Hasbro CEO Chris Cocks Is Talking About AI in D&D Again

Chris Cocks, the CEO of Hasbro, is talking about the usage of AI in Dungeons & Dragons again. In a recent interview with Semafor, Cocks once again brought up potential usage of AI in D&D and other Hasbro brands. Cocks described himself as an "AI bull" and offered up a potential subscription service that uses AI to enrich D&D campaigns as a way to integrate AI. The full section of Semafor's interview is below:

Smartphone screens are not the toy industry’s only technology challenge. Cocks uses artificial intelligence tools to generate storylines, art, and voices for his D&D characters and hails AI as “a great leveler for user-generated content.”

Current AI platforms are failing to reward creators for their work, “but I think that’s solvable,” he says, describing himself as “an AI bull” who believes the technology will extend the reach of Hasbro’s brands. That could include subscription services letting other Dungeon Masters enrich their D&D campaigns, or offerings to let parents customize Peppa Pig animations. “It’s supercharging fandom,” he says, “and I think that’s just net good for the brand.”

The D&D design team and others involved with D&D at Wizards of the Coast have repeatedly stood by a statement posted back in 2023 that said that D&D was made by humans for humans. The full, official stance on AI in D&D by the D&D team can be found below.

For 50 years, D&D has been built on the innovation, ingenuity, and hard work of talented people who sculpt a beautiful, creative game. That isn't changing. Our internal guidelines remain the same with regards to artificial intelligence tools: We require artists, writers, and creatives contributing to the D&D TTRPG to refrain from using AI generative tools to create final D&D products. We work with some of the most talented artists and creatives in the world, and we believe those people are what makes D&D great.

 

[Von Ether]

For me, this is one of those "joking/not joking" statements CEO blurt out because:

• If a CEO doesn't say they are "AI bullish" then he loses the investors chasing the latest buzz word
• If someone actually creates an AI thing that fits D&D, he can take credit for either finding it or shepherding it

Seeing as CEOs have a revolving door at WotC, this is also safely kicking the can down the road for another CEO to deliver until another buzz word takes over.

 

[Oofta]

For me, this is one of those "joking/not joking" statements CEO blurt out because:

• If a CEO doesn't say they are "AI bullish" then he loses the investors chasing the latest buzz word
• If someone actually creates an AI thing that fits D&D, he can take credit for either finding it or shepherding it

Seeing as CEOs have a revolving door at WotC, this is also safely kicking the can down the road for another CEO to deliver until another buzz word takes over.

Never underestimate the "buzzword of the moment" impact on what managers talk about whether or not it actually means anything.

 

[GMMichael]

This is why the 'its just a tool' people are missing the point.

If it CAN be leveraged to ruin the experience, as long as it makes money, it will be.

What about the fact that people use tools, but AI uses people?

Or: a tool is supposed to make your job easier, not make you unnecessary?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Never underestimate the "buzzword of the moment" impact on what managers talk about whether or not it actually means anything.

Yuuuuuuuuuup.

We saw the same thing but to a lesser extent with "blockchain" only a few years ago (thankfully "NFT" didn't really make it as far). Sometimes fairly horrifying amounts of money/effort were thrown at it too, and that's certainly happening to a larger degree with AI. There are legit uses (like, extracting specific types of data from a document which might itself vary a fair bit), but they're getting mixed in with complete made-up nonsense and the business-fantasies about firing half their employees and so on.

 

[Oofta]

What about the fact that people use tools, but AI uses people?

Or: a tool is supposed to make your job easier, not make you unnecessary?

You mean like John Henry being replaced by the steam-powered rock drill? The roughly 30% of all people worked on the farm a century ago versus the 2% today? All those people who used to balance the books by hand that have been replaced by spreadsheets and other computer software?

Technology has been replacing people for a long, long time. We don't really know what impact AI will have.

 

[Oofta]

Yuuuuuuuuuup.

We saw the same thing but to a lesser extent with "blockchain" only a few years ago (thankfully "NFT" didn't really make it as far). Sometimes fairly horrifying amounts of money/effort were thrown at it too, and that's certainly happening to a larger degree with AI. There are legit uses (like, extracting specific types of data from a document which might itself vary a fair bit), but they're getting mixed in with complete made-up nonsense and the business-fantasies about firing half their employees and so on.

You mean my NFT of a monkey isn't worth anything?

 

[The Sigil]

I stumbled across this and found it interesting as it feels like perhaps the "AI argument" is 100 years old.

"Machinery is performing great service for mankind. But a Machine is not an artist. The high purpose of Machinery is to save Men and Women from ignoble and soulless labor, not to perform tasks that are only well done by the hands and hearts of gifted musicians." (See A ROBOT HAS NO SOUL | flying-cars )

A similar sentiment is in the "I want AI to do my dishes and my laundry so I can do art, not to do art so I can do my dishes and my laundry" quote.

I think ENWorld skews towards older players and DMs (myself included), and as mentioned upthread, part of the reason people get into DMing is that they enjoy the work of putting together a campaign. These types think the work that goes into adventure prep and worldbuilding IS the "art" part of the game.

But one man's art is another man's trash... given there are more players than DMs, have we given consideration to the possibility that we are in the minority? That for most D&D players, the "adventure prep" and "worldbuilding" are the "tedious" parts of the game and taking on the role of a character and having their time in the spotlight is the "art" part of the game. For some players, the game is a pretext for the real "art" part of the game... "hanging out with friends." For others, min-maxing might be the "art" of the game.

The point is, there are parts of the experience that each of us finds tedious, and we put up with it for the sake of enjoying the parts we find fun. What I find tedious, someone else may love and vice versa. As a specific example, I suck at drawing anything beyond stick figures, so trying to illustrate NPCs or monsters is horribly tedious. Using AI art to generate these illustrations would be a boon for me.

For others, populating a dungeon might be tedious... and we see this going all the way back to 1e. How is "using AI to generate a dungeon" much different that "dungeon generation via rolling randomly on tables?" In this case, AI dungeon generation might be considered "random tables 5.0" or whatever.

I have studied AI and how it works (including having a working understanding of the math models behind it), and what we've invented is IMO something akin to an infinite number of monkeys and typewriters. The difference between the random tables in the 1e DMG and, say, an AI dungeon generator Dungeon Alchemy is really just speed, isn't it?

I didn't grow up with AI, so I'm not comfortable using it. Fine. But those that grew up with the tech will be comfortable using it. They won't be "wrong." Yes, it's going to replace the jobs of some artists and writers over time (this is neither angry nor condescending, it is just a plain statement of fact) in the same way other jobs were disrupted by technology. Over time, the younger generation will have incorporated AI into their way of life and they will produce other things that haven't been invented yet, just as the current 20-somethings are all "digital natives" in the way older generations aren't.

The "older crowd" will never full adopt AI just as the Greatest Generation never really adopted mobile phones, the Baby Boomers haven't yet truly adopted the "customized watch content" and prefer TV, the Gen X-ers still prefer voice calls to texting, and so on. It's just "what you grew up with and what you are comfortable with" - it's an aesthetic, probably not a moral right or wrong.

That said, I still want AI to do the tedious stuff so I can do the fun stuff.

 

[Stalker0]

Ultimately the key statements made in the OP are not in conflict.

On the one hand, Hasbro has made it clear that their future is in digital subscriptions. That the treadmill of endless edition books should give way to a suite of online tools that players and DM use and enjoy (and pay a regular fee for).

AI is just one new part of the puzzle, its being integrated everywhere, it would be ludicrous from a business standpoint not to include it.


On the other, they are committing to keep humans in charge of the creative products they do make. We will see if that promise holds up as AI continues to improve but their goal seems to be if its a WOTC made product, it is made by human hands.

 

[dave2008]

Frankly I think the “this” is literally whatever WotC thinks they can get people to pay a monthly subscription for. If that means generating adventure concepts, or building encounters, or populating dungeon rooms/hexes, or distributing treasure, or drawing maps, or some combination of the above, then that’s what it will be. Coming from the CEO of Hazbro, this sentiment isn’t about seeing a consumer need he thinks AI can fill, it’s about seeing an untapped avenue for monetization and wanting to come up with any excuse to tap it. That’s why the focus is on the subscription model rather than on what the service people would be subscribing to actually does. Because the subscription is the part he actually cares about; what service it provides is incidental to him.

That is possible, but I am not sure AI is really the best technology to do many of those things. It seems to me it is more a buzzword than actual knowledge of the tech that will be implemented.

 

[dave2008]

Whatever it is, I don’t want it.

My question is that most of what he seems to be talking about is not AI, but technology to help digital gamers. You don't need or possibly even want AI for much of what he is talking about. To me, he seems like he is saying AI, and he really means digital tech to help gamers (and make money).

So are you against digital gaming or against AI or both or AI in some situations, but not all?